Equating 'legitimate expectations' with 'possessions' (ECHR)
Written by Ivan Mifsud Friday, 21 May 2010 03:10 Last Updated on Friday, 21 May 2010 03:25
18/05/2010, Strasbourg (Applic. No. 16021/02). The European Court of Human Rights ruled that the applicant had suffered a violation of Protocol 1, article 1, having been denied of a legitimate expectation that it would receive a subsidy.
Article 1 of Protocol 1 states that ‘every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions…’ . The Court equated the applicant's legitimate expectation with a ‘possession’.
Applicant was a manufacturer, that way back in 1985 had applied for funding to expand an industrial plant. The applicant had been given ‘provisional’ funding in 1987, and later informed that it would be entitled to further funding equivalent to over 1.5 million Euro, after the work was completed and subject to the satisfactory operation of the industrial plant.
In 1988, while work was in progress, the applicant company increased its investment and applied for the subsidy to be reassessed. It was entitled to do this under the laws of the time. However it took the agency which handled such matters until 1994 to inspect the plant, by when the law had changed to the effect that the subsidy could only be worked out on the original 1985 application.
The ECHR did not object to the change in the law, which was aimed at keeping costs in control, but found objection to the fact that whereas industrial production commenced in 1990, it took the agency responsible for subsidies four years to inspect the plant, by which time the law had changed. Had the formalities been carried out properly and promptly, the new rules would not have affected this project at all.
The Court reserved the question of compensation under art. 41 for a subsequent decision.
To read the judgement click here
More
Newsflash
Registration is free of charge and gives you access to the WIKI section, where you will find a lot of useful information!